E 

440 




Gass E ^-4 
Book 3j-l 



INTERVENTION FOR FREEDOM. 




ADDRESS' OF HON: GfF. BAILEY, 

j^rr i^iTa3B3:BXJK.G{-, 
Friday Evening, Aug. 24th, 1860. 

[bEPOKTED by MR. H. E. EOCKWELL.] 



Three months ago, the National Republi- 
can, party, at a convention called for that 
purpose — one of the largest and most numer- 
ously attended, perhaps, of any ever held in 
the. United States. — nominated as a candidate 
foi' the highest office in the gift of the Amer- 
ican people, that hone^, tried and faithful 
exponent of National Republican principles, 
Abraham Lincoln of Illinois ; the published 
record of whose political faith, contains these 
words, "I am impliedly, if not expressly, 
pledged to a belief that it is the rigid and the 
duty of Congress to prohibit slavery in all the 
United States Territories." 

The same convention, nominated as its can- 
didate for the second office in the gift of the 
people that gallant son of the east, that stead- 
fast friend of Republican principles, Hanni- 
bal. Hamlin of Maine. 

-And Mr. Hamlin has placed his opinion on 
record in these words : — 

hold that the Constitution, in and of it- 
selfj .by its express language, authorizes Con- 
gress to inhibit this institution (slavery) in 
ofeir territories. Having the power to act, 
what is the responsible duty which ! feel im- 
posed- on me? it is that I should exert all 
the power which the Constitution gives to 
exclude the institution of skvery from our 
temtories now free, because it is a social, 



r.ioral, and intellectual evi 



ur position is 



unquestionable. We stand in defence of free 
soil, and resist aggressive slavery, and we de- 
mand enactments for the protection of free 
soilr against its aggressions." 
. -The National Republican party in 1856, 
adopteci. these resolutions m its platform of 
faith;— 



Resolved, That, with our Republican fa- 
thers, we hold it to be a self evidenit truth 
that all men are endowed with the inalienable 
rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of hap- 
piness — and that the primary object and ulte- 
rior design of our Federal government were 
to secure these rights to all persons within 
its exclusive jurisdiction. That as our Re- 
publican fathers, when they had abolished 
slavery in all our national territories, ordained 
that lio persons should be deprived of life, 
liberty, or property, without due process of 
law, it becomes our duty to maintain this pro- 
vision of the Constitution against all attempts 
to violate it for the purpose of establishing 
slavery in any territory of the United States, 
by positive legislation, prohibiting its exten- 
sion or existence therein. 

Resolved, That the Constitution confers 
upon Congress sovereign power over the Ter- 
ritories of the United States for their gotern- 
rnent, and that in the exercise of this power, 
it is both the right and the duty of congress, 
to prohibit in the territories, those twin relics 
of barbarism— Polygamy and Slavery. 

The National Republican Convention which 
nominated Lincoln and Hamlin adopted this 
resolution. 

Resolved, That the normal condition of all 
the territory of the United States is that of 
freedom. That as our Republican fathers, 
when they had abolished slavery in all our 
national territory, ordained that "no person 
should be deprived of life, liberty, or proper- 
ty, without due process of law," it becomes 
our duty, by legislation, whenever such legis- 
lation is necessary, to maintain this provision 
of the Constitution against all attempts to vi- 



olate it ; and we deny the authority of Con- 
gress, of a territorial legislature, or of any in- 
diriduals, to give legal existence to slavery in 
any Territory of the United States. 

The Republican Party of the State of Mas- 
sachuietts, at its last annual, Convention, ex- 
pressed the doctrine of the party in this 
State, in these words : — 

Resolvedf That we believe in the Jefferso- 
cian ordinance of 1787, and its applicati»n 
to all the Territories of all the Federal gov- 
ernment ; we hold it to be the duty of Con- 
gress to secure to all the inhabitants thereof, 
the free ownership of their own bodies, and 
their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness, without which it is impossible that 
the people should be left free to form their 
own institutions in their own way. 

This, then, is the Republican faith to-day, 
as gleaned from authentic sources. It is the 
doctrine of Congressional Intervention in the 
territories, for the exclusion of slavery ; and 
it is the same doctrine as that contained in 
the JefFersonian Ordinance, and the Wilmot 
Proviso. 

Stephen A. Douglas, the great standard 
bearer of the Democratic Party, holds the op- 
posite doctrine, and has placed his belief on 
record in these words : — 

"The position that I have ever taken has 
been, that slavery, and all other questions 
relative to the domestic policy of the Territo- 
ries, ought to be left to the decision of the 
people themselves." 

The Democratic National Convention, in 
1856, gave us this resolution as expressive of 
its political faith upon this question : — 

Resolved, That the American democracy 
recognize and adopt the principles contained 
in the organic laws establishing the territo- 
ries of Kansas and Nebraska, as embodying 
the only sound and safe solution of the slave- 
ry question, upon which the great national 
idea of the people of this whole country can 
repose in its determined conservation of the 
Union, and non-interference of Congress with 
slavery in the territories, or in the district of 
Columbia. 

> At the last Convention of the National 
Democratic Party, in Baltimore, the princi- 
ples of the Cincinnati Platform, which I have 
just read, were re-affirmed and endorsed by 
the Democratic Party for 1860. 

The Democratic Party of Massachusetts, 
at its last State Convention, adopted this res- 
olution : 

Rtsolved, That we find no necessity for ad- 
diti<m or change in the great doctrine of pop- 



ular Botereignty as declared br the Masia^ 
chusetts Resolutions of 1848, tkat we are ep- 



posed to the exercise of any jurisdiction lo 
Congress over the matter of slavery in the 
territories, but we are in favor of leaving to 
the people who inhabit them the right to es- 
tablish tneir own domestic institutions under 
the principles of the Constitution. 

This doctrine of the Democracy, it the 
doctrine of non-intervention, made famiUar 
to us under the name of ♦'souatter sovereign- 
ty "Popular sovereignty,* and the strange- 
ly inappropriate one of "self •government.* 

The living, practical question, now present- 
ed to the Republicans of this locality, is this 
— shall we abandon the cherished principles 
of our chosen standard bearer, proclaimea by 
the Republican Party of the nation, at its 
first and last conventions, and affirmed by 
the Republican Party of the State of Massa- 
chusetts ? Shall we turn coldly away from 
the principles thus enunciated, and embrace 
the doctrine of our opponents ? I find Be 
fault with those who honestly embrace this 
faith , if any such are present, but for one, my 
way is clear ; when I abandon the principles 
of my party upon a great, living and vital 
question, and adopt those of ths adversary, I 
will adopt his name also. I will enroll my 
name with his, march under his banner, and 
share with him the glory of victory, or the 
shame of defeat. I have presented this ques- 
tion as the only question before us ; and I so 
understand it, because I am not aware that 
the Republican Party has taken a positiea 
adverse to the doctrine that as a general rule, 
the people of the territories may regulate 
their own affairs in their own way, saving and 
excepting that they shall not restrict emigra- 
tion from the states to the public domain, by 
legalizing therein great and atrocious crimes 
but shall retain the fundamental principles 
of the Government, — and acknowledge the 
elements and principles of the Declaration- 
of Independence. But we are met here with 
the statemnis that the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence set forth that governments derive 
their just power ftrom the consent of the gov- 
erned, and that we cannot in harmony with 
that principle, impose restrictions or regula- 
tions upon the people of the territories. Let 
me read to you — although you are perfectly 
familiar with it — the language of the Decla- 
ration of Independence upon this point : — 

••We hold these truths to be self etident, 
that all men are created equal; that they^ are 
endowed by their Creator, with certain inal- 
ienable rights J that among them are life, lib- 



m EXCHA!«GE 

JUL I « I9I5 



8 



«vty, »ad tht purauit of happiz^fta. That, to 
socurc these rights, gOTernments are instituted 
among men, deriting their just powers from 
the consent of the goyerned." 

By that language I will stand ; I will follow 
it to all its legitimate conclusions, and when 
the Anglo-Saxon giant goes into the territo- 
ries of the United States and attempts to 
govern with scourge and fetter the A frican 
slaTe, then the Renublican Party says, and it 
is the right and duty of Congress to say, 
"hands off" "fair play" in the public domain 
of the United States. You cannot govern in 
that way the weak African, without his con- 
sent, for Ho secure life^ liberty^ and the pur^ 
suit of happiness, governments derive their 
just powers from the consent of tjae governed." 

Is it not clear that governments cannot de- 
rive, the power from any source whatever, to 
deprive a guiltless man of "the right to life, 
Ubeity, and the pursuit of ham)iness," or del- 
egate that power to others? The white man, 
whether he goes from Massachusetts, from 
Maine, or from Georgia, or South Carolina, 
or Texas, as uu emigrant, or in any other ca- 
acity, into the territories of the United 

tates, carries with him, as I contend, and 
am ready to defend him in that right, the 
right of self-government. But the question 
presented to us is, in the language of Abra- 
ham Lincoln, "Shall we permit him to gov- 
ern another without his consent ?" It is un- 
doubtedly true, as has been stated by the 
leading spirit of the doctrine of popular sov- 
ereignty, Stephen A. Douglas, that the men 
who framed our government origmally, the 
men who were active in preparing and adopt- 
ing the Declaration of Independence, under- 
stood its limitations and its principles better 
than we do. It is well known, — and it was 
not by accident, — that the same master mind, 
the same great patriotic heart that framed and 
dictated the first law of Congress which pro- 
hibited slavery in the territories, also wrote 
the Declaration of Independence; and we can 
easily gather what his views were of the 
meaning of the words which I have just read. 

But it is unnecessary to pursue this line of 
argijiment ; both doctrines have been practi- 
cajly applied and tested. Let us appeal to 
History. From the fanciful theories, the in- 
geoioQs sophistries, and loose declamations, 
with which the public ear has been filled, and 
the public press has teemed, sincQ Stephen 
Am Douglas began his crusade against the 
principles of the Jefferson ian Ordinance, let 
us turn to the faith and practice of the fathers 
of the Kepublic, and renew the history of the 



pvohlbition of slavery in the territories, aisd 
its results, and then consider the history and 
results of non-intervention. 

At the close of the Revolutioniry War 
Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and 
Virginia claimed all that territory which now 
constitutes Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin 
and Michigan. Georgia and North Carolina 
claimed t/iat territory which now constitutes 
the states of Tennessee, Mississippi and Ala- 
bama. The other states complained that it 
was not fair that these few states should hold 
this territory, which had been defended with 
the common treasure, and for which a com- 
mon debt had been incurred, and claimed 
that it should become a part of the public 
fund. 

In 1784, or thereabouts, Massachusetts, 
New York, Connecticut and Virginia ceded 
to the confederated States all their claims to 
the territory northwest of the Ohio River, so 
that it passed under the control of the Con- 
federated Government : Georgia and North 
Carolina still retaining their territory. At 
the same time that this session was completed 
Congress raised a committee to report a plan 
for the government of this new territory. It 
was understood at that time that the territo- 
ry held by Georgia and North Carolina 
would soon be ceded to the general govern- 
ment. Thomas Jefferson was chairman of 
the Committee to whom the matter was re- 
ferred, and he reported to Congress a plan 
for the government of that territory, which 
is called the Jeffersonian Ordinance. In that 
plan there was a restriction, prohibiting sla- 
very in all the territory that had been, and 
all that should be, ceded to the United States 
— all that called the Northwest Territory, 
and also all that owned by the States of Geor- 
gia and North Carolina. Thus we see the 
same great man who wrote the Declaration of 
Independence proposing that Congress should 
prohibit slavery in all the territories, and es- 
tablish freedom forever, therein. 

Under the articles of confederation, all 
votes were taken ty states, each state being 
entitled to but one vote ; and a majority of 
all the states — that is to say seven— was nec- 
essary to carry any question, except that of 
adjournment from day to day. The vote in 
Congress on this proposition of Thomas Jeff- 
erson to dedicate to free labor all the territo- 
ry then ceded or thereafter to be ceded to the 
United States, is a curious and instructive 
one, inasmuch as under this rule, in Congress, 
seven advocates of the extension of slavery 
were enabled to triumph over seventefin 



friends of free labor. Six states voted yea} 
three stales voted nay. One state, North 
Carolina, did not vote, her delegation being 
equally divided, and three states were ab-sent. 
Although the states present and voting stood 
two to on3 in favor of the proposition, still it 
was lost, seven states not voting in theaffirm- 
atire. An analysis of the votes of the sev- 
«raJ delegations shows, twenty four members 
present, seventeen of them voting yea, while 
only seven voted nay. One more affirmative 
vote from North Carolina, would have given 
the requisite number of states, and carried 
the prohibition. Had it been carried and 
sustained it is more than probable that this 
generation would not have rvitnessed a sin. 
gle slave west of the Alleghany mountams. 

In 1787, Nathan Dane, of Massachusetts, 
as chairman of a committee raised for that 
purpose, reported an ordinance for the gov- 
ernment of the Northwest Territory, being 
that portion ceded by Virginia and the north- 
ern states. In that ordinance he embodied 
the provision of Jefferson in a prohibitory 
clause excluding slavery forever. That Or- 
dinance, by a Congress composed of men so 
fresh from' the formation of the government 
was adopted with entire unanimity. It was 
stated by Mr. Douglas, in his great speech in 
the United States Senate, when advocating 
the passage of the Kansas Nebraska act, which 
repealftd the Missouri Compromise, "that al- 
though every state within that northwestern 
territory came in as a free state, and is free 
to-day, still they were not indebted, nor are 
we indebted, to the ordinance of 1787 for 
that fact. I think the history ol' the times 
demonstrate clearly that this position is not 
correct. It is said it was because the people 
chose freedom rather than slavery that thpy 
became free states, and not because they 
were prohibited from holding slaves there. 
This is a pretty material and important ques- 
tion. If it is so then it may be said perhaps, 
ihis prohibition of slavery in the territories 
is noi of much consequence ; but if, on in- 
vestigation, we find the people durmg their 
territorial life, struggled against this prohibi- 
tion of Congress and sought by every possi- 
ble means to override it, and to introduce 
slavery into the territories, becuase they sin- 
cerely believed it for their interes"; to do it, 
then we may say the ordinance prevented 
the introduction of Slavery. Let us turn to 
the history of the limes. Seven years after the 
adoption of the constitution, and seven years 
after the ordinance of 1787 was ratifie'l by 
congress, under the constitution, John Edgar 



and others from the part of the territory 
which now forms the state of Ohio, appiie4 
to Congress for permission to hold slaves, an.d 
that Congress would remove that part of the 
ordinance which prevented it. This applica- 
tion was referred to a committee, but the 
prayer of the petitioners was not granted. 
In 1S02, Ohio adonted a Constitution for a 
state government and came into the Union 
with a free constitution as one of the states. 
Congress, in recognizing her, in the act un- 
der which she came in, was careful to men- 
tion the fact that her constitution conformed 
to the ordinance of 1787; therefore it ap- 
pears, while Ohio sought the privilege of 
holding slaves, and asked for the removal of 
the restriction which prevented it, she yield- 
ed to the restriction made by the iuterven- 
tion of CoD.^ress and came in as a free stale. 

The balance of the Northwest Territory re- 
mained, by the name of Indian Territory. 
In December 1802, the people of Indiana 
Territory held a convention at Vincennes, 
over which Wm. Henry Harrison presided, 
who was afterward governor'of that territor}-, 
and since president of the United States. 
That convention adopted resolutions declar- 
ing their desire to hold slaves, setting forth 
that their immigration was mosdy from the 
southern states, and asking Congress to sus- 
pend the sixth article of the compact, which 
was the one prohibiting slavery, Jn 1803 
VVm. Henry Harrison addressed a letter to 
the Speaker of the House of Representatives 
at Washington, inclosing the proceedings of 
the convention, which was referred to a select 
committee to consider and report upon. Thai 
committee, after duly considering the ques- 
tion, made the following report Xvlarch 2d, 
1803 :— 

"That the rapid population of the state of 
Ohio sufHcienrly evinces, in the opinion of your 
committee, that the labor of slaves is " not 
necessary to promote the growth and settle- 
ment of colonies m that region. That this 
labor demonstrably the dearest of any, can 
only be employed to advantage in the culti- 
vation of products more valaable than any 
known to th^t quarter of the United States. 
That the committee deem it highly dangerous 
and inexpedient to impair a provision v/isely 
calculated to promote the happiness and pros- 
perity of the Northwestern country, and to 
give strength and security to that extensive 
frontier. . In the salutary operation of this 
sagacious and benevolent restraint, it is be- 
lieved liiat the inhabitants of Indiana will, at 
no very distant day find ample remuneration 



.5 

'iov a temporary privation of labor and of emi- 

•(« RMved. That it is inexpedient to stis- 
-•pend, for a limited time, the operation of the 
-sixth article of compact between the original 

wtates, and the people and states west of the 

river Ohio. 

• P' -.This report, which savoi^so strongly or 
Black Republicanism, wa^pfitten by John 
i -Randolph of Koanoke. believed then, 

> and congress concurred' with him, that it was 
"their right and'daty to guarantee to all set- 
tlers in that territory, by positive legislation, 
the ;ownership of their own bodies. 
- In 1804 another application was made by 
S^he people of the territories and referred to a 
■ new committee ; the committee to whom the 
■m-tter was referred, reported as follovvs : 
:lcsQlved. That the sixth article of the Or- 
?.nc3 of 1787, which prohibited slavery 
..within the said Territory, be suspended in a 
^^ualified manner, for ten years, &o as to per- 
-^aiiit the introduction of slaves, born within 
ct^ia United States, from any of the individual 
rates ; provided, that such individual state 
does not permit the importation of slaves 
. from foreign countries ; and provided further 
.that the descendants of all such slaves, shall, 
.if males, be free at the age of twenty-five 
years, and if females, at the age of twenty- 
.'■.ene years. 

This favorable report was lost, and the Or- 
dinance of '87 again ratified and confirmed, 
.V Til .1305 vstill another application was made 
■by the people of this vast territory, asking 
Congress to remove the restriction and an- 
e ther committee to whom the matter was re- 
ferred reported as follows ; 

'•That, hiving attentively considerea the 
facts stated in the said petitions and memori- 
als, they are of opinion that a qualified sus- 
pension, for a limited time, of the sixth arti- 
cle of the compact between the original states, 
and the people and stages west of the river 
Ohio, would'be beneficial to the people of the 
Indiana Territoi-y. The suspension of this 
article is an object aimed universally desired 
in that Terrilory, , - 

Resolved. That the sixth article of the Or- 
t--din&nce of 1787,- which prohibited slavery 
within .the Indiana Territory, be suspended 
for ten years, as, to permit the introduction 
Of slaves born v/iihiu the United States, from 
anv, of the iariividual states. 

This was not adopted, and Congress again 
I reafiirmed the- principles contained in the 
|l prohibition of the ordinauce of 1787. 
I But it may bo said that although the pec* 



pie of the territoriea were constantly making 
applications and were constamtiy resisted by 
congress, there is no conclusive evidence that 
at any time the people were generally in fa- 
vor oi slavery, and that perhaps they could 
not have elected a territorial legislature favor- 
able to establishing slaverj^ 

If this be so, then there is stilV at least, a 
quibble to which Mr. Douglas and his friends 
may ruing. Unfortunately for them, the pro- 
ceedings of congress cannot be obliterated. 
Its annals develop the follovfing record, un- 
der date of Jan. 20, 1807 : 

The speaker laid before the house a letter 
from William Henry Harrison, governor of 
the Indiana Territory, enclosing certain reso- 
lutions passed by the legislative council and 
house of representatives of the said Territory 
relative to a suspension, for a certain period, 
of the sixth article of compact between the 
United States and the territories and states 
northwest of the River Ohio, made on the 
thirteenth of July, one thousand seven hun- 
dred and oighty-seven ; which were read as 
follows : — 

Resolved, Unanimously, by the legislative 
council and house of representatives of the 
Indiana Territory, that a suspension of the 
oixth article of compact between the United 
States and the territories' and states riorth- 
w^est of the river Ohio, passed the 13th day of 
July, 1787, for the term of ten years, would 
be highly advantageous to the said Territory, 
and meet the approbation of at least, .nine- 
tenths of the good citizens of the same. 

Resolved, Unanimously, that the abstract 
question of liberty and slavery is not 'consid- 
ered as involved in a suspension of the said 
article, inasmuch as the number of slaves in 
the United States would not be .augmented 
by the measure. 

Resolved, Unanimously, that the suspen- 
sion of the said article would be equally ad- 
vantageous to the Territory, to the state from 
whence the negroes would be brought, and 
to the negroes themselves. 

To the Territory, because of its " situation 
v/ith regard to other states; it must' be set- 
tled by emigrants from those in which sla- 
very is tolerated, or for many years remain 
in its present situation, its citizens deprived 
of the greater part of their political rights, 
and, indeed, of all those which distinguish 
the American from the citizens and subjects 
of other governments. 

The states which are over-burdened with 
negroes would be benefitted by their citizens 
having an opportunity- -of disposing of the 



BfgfOM which they cannot comfortably sup- 
port, or of remoTin? with them to a country 
abounding with all the necesaaries of life ; 
and the negro himself would exchange a scan- 
ty pittance of the coarsest food for a plenti- 
ful and nourishing diet, and a situation which 
admits not the most distant prospect of eman- 
cipation, for one which presents no consider- 
able obstacle to his wishes. 

Resolved, Unanimously, that the citizens of 
this part of the former Northwestern Terri- 
iory, consider themselves as having claims 
upon the indulgence of Congress in regard to 
the suspension of the said article, because, at 
th« time of the adoption of the ordmance of 
1787, slavery was tolerated, and slaves gen- 
erally possessed by the citizens then inhab- 
iting the country, amounting to at least one- 
half the present population of Indiana, and 
because the said ordinance was passed in 
Congress, when the said citizens were not 
represented in that body, without their 
bemg consulted, and without their knowledge 
and approbation, 

Ruolvedf Unanimously, that from the situ- 
ation, soil, climate, and productions of the 
Territory, it is not believed that the number 
of slaves would ever bear such pr oportion to 
the white population, as to endanger the in- 
ternal peace and prosperity of the country. 

BjMolytdj Unanimously, that copies of these 
resolutions be delivered to the governor of 
this Territory, to be by him forwarded to the 
president of the senate and to the speaker of 
the house of representatives of the United 
States, with a request that they will lay the 
same before the senate and house of rep- 
resentatives, over which they respectively pre- 
side. 

Resolved, Unanimously, That a copy of these 
resolutions be delivered to the delegate to 
congress from this territory, and that he be, 
and hereby is, instructed to use his best en- 
deavors to obtain a suspension of the said ar- 
ticle. 

The resolutions were referred to Mr. Parke, 
Mr. Masters, Mr. Rhea of Tennessee, Mr. 
Sandford, Mr. Alston, Mr. Jeremiah Morrow, 
and Mr« Trigg, to examine and report their 
opinion thereupon to the house. 

TTixtrsday, February 12.— Mr. Parke, from 
the committee to whom was referred the let- 
ter of William Henry Harrisen, governor of 
the Indian territory, enclosing certain resolu- 
tions of tile legislative councu and house of 
representatives of the said territory, made 
the following report : 

That the reBoIutions of the legislative coon- 



ell and house of repressntitlv <js of the lodi* 
ana territory relate to a suspension, fft the 
term of ten vear9, of the sixth article of the 
compact between the United States and the 
territories northwest of the river Ohio, passad 
the 13th July, 1787. That article declares 
"there shall bejieither slavery nor involunta* 
ry servitude iijlthe said territory." 

The suspension of the said article would 
operate an immediaie and essential benefit tp 
the territory, as emigration to it will bej in- 
considerable for many jears, except through 
those states where slavery is tolerated ; and 
although) it is not considered expedient to 
force the population of the territories, yet C 
it is desirable to connect its scattered settle- 
ments ; and, in regard to political rights, to 
place it on an equal footing with the different 
states. From the interior situation of the 
territory, it is not believed that slaves yroM 
ever become so numerous as to endanger the 
internal peace or future prosperity of the 
country. The current of emigration flows to 
the western country ; the territories ought to 
be opened to their introduction. TheaJt)* 
stract question of liberty and slavery is not 
involved in the propqsed measure, as slavery 
e2dsts to a considerable extent in differeot 
parts of the Union ; it would not augment 
the number of slaves, but merely authorise 
the removal to Indiana of such as are held in 
bondage in the United States. If slavery is 
an evil, means ought to be devised to render 
it least dangerous to the community, and by 
which the hopeless situation of the slave! 
would be most ameliorated; and to accom- 
plish these objects no measure would be so 
effectual as the one proposed. The commit- 
tee, therefore, respectfully submit to the 
house the following resolutions : 

Resolved, That it is expedient to suspend, 
from and after the 1st day of January, 1808* 
the sixth article of compact between the Uni- 
ted States and the territories and states 
northwest of the river Ohio, passed the 13th 
day of July, 1787, for the term of ten years. 

Thus it appears that all the co-ordinate 
branches of ihe government were unanimous 
on this point. The entire body of the legis- 
lature expressed its desire for the establish- 
ment of slavery. The council, by a unani- 
mous vote, expressed the same wish ; and the 
governor ooneurred therein. This, it must 
be borne in mind, was the territory compris- 
ing what now forms the states of Indiana, Il- 
linois, Michigan and Wisconsin. Congress 
again resisted the application, and,against the 
unanimous wish of the people of the territory, 



7 



ihiUted mot th* obscnrattce of the sacred or- 
didittee which consecrated her to freedom 
and ^ree labor foreter. Can any reasoning 
being demand higher or better evidence that 
the people of the territory wanted siavery, 
and would hate established it but for the per- 
sistent intervention of congress? 

We have seen th^f , petitions presented 
year after year to ConfOf^ss, and by Congress 
resisted; and we at lart see them,. rising with 
entire unanimity, and appealing to Congress 
for the removal of the ordinance of 1787. — 
At th^ next session, a fresh application was 
Bade, which shared the fate of the five pre- 
vious ones. Baffled in every attempt, and 
(''^(dOuraged by successive defeats, the people 
rested from their struggle with Congress un- 
til 1613, when Illinois applied for permission 
to employ slaves in the salt works of that ter- 
ritory. The committee reported n bill en- 
titled. "An act to encourage the manufacture 
of salt in Illinois, by a partial introduction of 
slavery therein.** This was lost, and I fail to 
find trace of any subsequent effort. 

Thus for a period of seventeen years, we 
find the people struggling to remove the or- 
dinance and to mtroduce slav^. Seven 
times the J' applied to Congress, and seven 
times Congress refused to grant their prayer. 

Afterwards, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and 
Wisconsin, in compliance with the ordinance 
ol*87, came into the line of states, with free 
constitutions, aad their prosperity, their 
immense relative prosperity, as compared 
with the states along their southern and west- 
em line, where slavery is established, is abun- 
dant evidence that not only these states, but 
the whole country, have been benefitted by 
that intervention. Now, in the light of the 
record and of history, can any man say that 
the prohibition of slavery by congiess did not 
give these states freedom ?' 

This question of slavery has been a trouble- 
some one in this country through its entire 
history ; one upon whvch the people have felt 
deeply, and one which has occasioned more 
trouble than any other. But we here see 
that during a long period of time, commenc- 
ing with the foundation of the government, 
Knd down to the Kansas<Nebraska act almost, 
this troublesome question of slavery found a 
peaceful solution under the doctrine of inter- 
vention by congress ; that, whenever, in a ter- 
ritory, congress extended the principles of 
the Declaration of Independence; wherever 
congress guaranteed to the people of the ter- 
ritories these principles, that there were no 
strifes^ no bloodshed upon the question of 



slavery ; but that the inhabitants of the terri- 
ries found the peaceful repose of liberty un- 
der the law. Though there were strifes, they 
were in congress by petition, by remonstrance, 
but never by bloodshed. 

In 1803, or about that time, the United 
States acquired by purchase all that vast ter- 
ritory which borders on the western shore of 
the Missihsippi, stretching from Canada to the 
Gulf of Mexico, known as the Louisiana ter- 
ritorjr. After a time, the people of Missouri 
apphed for admission into the Union, and 
you all know the struggle and excitement 
which followed. The contest was at last set- 
tled by prohibiting slavery in that part of the 
Louisiana purchase which lies north of 36 de- 
grees and 30 minutes. That compromise 
consecrated a large part of the territory to 
freedom, in which part were Kansas and Ne- 
braska. Kansas, by her central positon, fine 
soil, and delightful climate, began to attract 
the attention of leading men in the United 
States. They saw that soon it would be peo- 
pled and would apply for a state government. 
The opponents of free labor dreaded the ad- 
mission of Kansas as a free state, and aocoid- 
ingly, at a proper time a bill was introduced, 
called the Kansas-Nebraska act containing a 
clause, as it finally passed, as follows : 

That the constitution and all laws of the 
United States which are not locally inapplica- 
ble shall have the same force and effect with- 
in the said territory of Kansas as elsewhere 
within the United States, except the eighth 
section of the act preparatory to the admis- 
sion of Missouri into the Union, approved 
March 6, 1820, which being incormstent mlk 
the principles of mn-interveTition by congress 
with slavery in the states and terriioriest m 
recognized by the legislation of 1850, com- 
monly called the compromise measures, is 
hereby declared inoperative and void ; it be- 
ing the true intent and meaning of this act 
not to legislate slavery into any te rritory or 
slate, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to 
leave the people thereof perfectly free to 
lorm and regulate their domestic institutions 
in their own way, subject only to the consti- 
tution of the United Slates. 

The passage of that act repealed the Mis- 
souri compromise. It broke the silver bond ; 
it destroyed the charmed line which conse- 
crated all this immense territory, including 
Kansas, to freedom, because, in the language 
of the act, it was opposed to the doctrine of 
non-intervention with slavery in the territo- 
ries. We have seen the working of the princi- 
ple of intervention. We shall now begin to 




8 



see the effect of the doctrine which is pressed 
upon our acceptance. From this time a new- 
system was adopted with reference to the ter- 
ritories, and they were thrown open to com" 
petition between the friends of iree and. the 
friends of slave labor. What was the result ? 
The scenes in Kansas are too recent and to 
fresh in your minds to require recital. You 
all know that immediately upon the passage 
of the Kansas-Nebraska act, men rushed to 
Kansas from Missouri, — preparations having 
been made in anticipation of its passage, — 
for the purpose, the avowed purpose of estab- 
lishing slavery there at any and all hazards. 
In order to meet that rush of people from 
the southern states, of men who we.nt there, 
not as honest settlers, but to establish slavery, 
as appears, from their sworn testimony,.' the 
north, was driven to the same distarit territory. 
New England sent her young men and her 
strong men, her strength and her patriotism, 
to m'.aet want, death, and the fire of civil 
war, in the attempt to restore and bring back 
to rreedom that territory, which,, by the adop- 
tion of the doctrine of non-intervention, had 
been thrown open to slavery. 

The first fruit of the doctrine of the non- 
intervention of congres's, was civil war. No 
longer did the people find a peacefui solution 
of the question, but they were compelled to 
fight over again the battle of the revolution ; 
once more they were obliged, by force cf 
arms, by all the horrors of war, to re-assert 
and re-establish the principles of our great 
charter of liberty. 

Must the battles of the revolution be re- 
fought in all pur territories? Is it wise to a- 
dopt that course, or is it better to retain the 
poilcy of the fathers of the governmeat, which 
so long gave peace to the- territories by the 
prohibition of slavery therein ? 

It happened to me, sir, in 1857, to be in 
the Massachusetts State House, when an ap- 
plication was pending oefore the committee on 
federal relations, in behalf of the people of 
Kansas for an appropriation from the state of 
Massachusetts, to aid in defsnding the rights 
of the emmigrants from Massachusetts in the 
territory against the aggressions of the men 
who were sent there fr^m ihe south to estab- 
lish slavery. I remember well, that, pending 
the hearing before that commltee., there ap- 
peared before them a tall man, past the mid- 
dle age, whose smileless face bore evidence 
that he had seen much of the dust and ashes 
of life, and who bore upon his countenance 



evidence of an iron will and a resolute pur- 
pose which nothing could quell. Having 
given an account, th^t brought tears to the- 
eyes of the L <^g§.i»it|M|t. of the privations .andfij 




perils whic: 
to retain t 
*-I went t 
sons. were ta 
fians ; one of ti 
month ; the ot 
a burning sun for a Ion 



jf Kansas had bofne '51 
freedom, he said ^ 

Two of those 
y the border ruf'- , 
t ic prison one^ ^ 
chains, undei: , 
istance, and kept 



four months in prison, until he beca.me a ma-/ 
niac. Another son was wounded to such an. , 
extent that he became a cripple for hie. One 
day, said he, I saw three nien lying on tht^;^ 
ground ; one of them still retained some signi ■ 
of life, but it was found that he had more than 
twenty buckshot and bullet wounds. The oth- 
er two were stark and stiff, having lain there 
until the insects had commenced their v,-orfc 
upon them. One of these was^ the. bydy of 
my own son."- From that we, can , gather 
soQieihiug of what civil war is ; we. can. learn . 
from it what a . fearful ordeal the people of the 
northwest territory. were spared by the peace- 
ful operation ^ the ordinances of 1787. ■ ^ . 

Far away in the northern-part of the stat^.qf ^ 
New York, where the Adirondack . mountains::; 
lift their piliars to ihe clouds, .there is. a 
green mound that covers the remains of the , 
old man to v.'hom I have alluded, and,, a slab 
at the he?,d.of his grave, tells .the:passer by . 
that the sleeper below was executecLin . Char- 
lestown, Virginia, on the 2nd of Deaember,, 
1859. , " 

There were consequences flowing from th.e . 
faking awav of tha restrictions in Kansas that 
cannot be unfolded at thisVrjine.' . 'i^he fesuUgof 
no ma'i can computer— tiie, terrible; and fearfufi*t 
results which have'^i'isen. from th^ introduc- ; 
tion cf the principle :of,no.a-interve»tion with . 
slavery in the territORies. » nc.ua.tDp^ ' . ' : 

Here then, we have in our s^i^sAj Ubiory, 
the two systems fairly contraste£l-rifiOpgre&- . 
sional interference on. "the. one feanfi^jpopuiar • 
sovereignty on the other. Under oa£-. we seer 
rive states "sec ureditofret'd'om in liie northweskiJ 
te rr itorv w it ho ut feiood .s ii ed xmd willioiit s irif ■ ^ 
Under the other we llave had ciwit war m ^ 
Kansas, and, on the lasticnony of Ste->': eii A. 
Douglas, slavery in' New Mexico, 
the: results. / . •> 

The ISaviour of mankind gave this rule : ■ 
"Bv iheir fniiis ve shall knowi^-them.'' In 
the light of history and by this^flivrne precept 
let us decide the a uesuoa before UH. 




